[Advaita-l] Shankara authenticates Shiva as the son of Brahma

[D Gayatri]

If Shankara had Shiva in mind, he would have said so explicitly. But
Shankara does not bring in Shiva anywhere, and to bring in Shiva based on
presence of Uma, is nothing but speculation. And Shankara himself does not
consider Shiva to be Brahman because in BU 1.4.11, he considers Shiva as
created. And he authenticates the portions of the Mahabharata where Shiva
is treated as son of brahma. Thus, there is no way Shankara would consider
Shiva as Brahman.


On Saturday, 13 August 2016, V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 12:12 AM, D Gayatri via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org');>>
> wrote:
>
>> Please apply your own
>> arthavada logic to the kena upanishad bhashya quote and you will realize
>> that Shiva has nothing to do with that episode. The term sarvajna Ishwara,
>> is neutral.
>>
>
> The terms might be neutral but the context in which Shankara uses it there
> is decidedly that of Shiva. Umā, the daughter of Himavān, cannot be stated
> to be living for ever with any other than Shiva, her consort. While Umā is
> brahmavidyā in that upanishad as Shankara himself says, the Brahman there
> is Shiva. The Suta samhita of the skanda purana too points out this.
>
>>
>>